Food Lubes Market

Machinery and equipment in the food industry do not differ from those used in other industries, but the environmental influences acting on them may be considerably more complex, Stempfel said. The equipment is cleaned daily, sometimes with high-pressure water washing and aggressive cleaning and sanitizing fluids. It also can be contaminated with active substances such as fruit juices and sugar. Finally, it can be exposed to extremely low to very high temperatures in short time periods, he added.

As a result, specialist knowledge and practical experience are very important for the best possible lubricant to be recommended and the lubrication maintenance intervals to be specified. This latter requirement is tailored to the particular application and the environmental conditions. Stempfel said, Oil change intervals depend more on lubricant contamination than on the reduction of its lubrication properties due to the degradation of additives or oxidation.

Quality, hygiene and product liability are exceptionally important matters in the food, drink and pharmaceuticals industries. Large sums are invested to produce a positive brand profile, Stempfel said, but a good reputation can be quickly ruined by the negative publicity of a product recall, which is often accompanied by financial consequences.

According to most regional legislation, a food manufacturer remains liable unless it can demonstrate that it has taken every conceivable step to prevent food contamination. Governments monitor all food manufacturers to ensure they comply with regional and international regulations.

Local authorities also have a joint responsibility for the safety of any food finding its way onto the market, Stempfel noted. Regulations in the body of law known as the Food Hygiene Regulations of the Consumer Goods Act have been in force since 1995. One major aspect of these regulations is the introduction of the HACCP concept, which is based on the United States model. The EU, in common with the U.S., uses HACCP to identify and control critical points in the preparation, packaging and distribution chain.

Stempfel listed other important European guidelines:

• Machinery Directive 2006/42/EC, which is a revised version of 89/392/EC of June 1989
• European Hygienic Engineering & Design Group (EHEDG) guideline #23: Production and use of food-grade lubricants, Part 1 and 2 (2009)

There is no international standard for food-compatible lubricants, Stempfel said. Therefore, it is normal practice to use U.S. standards issued by the Food and Drug Administration (USFDA) and Department of Agriculture (USDA). The USDA ceased registration of lubricants in 1998, and this function was taken over by the private institution NSF International.

Stempfel explained that the food market is one of the most innovative, and continues to face very strong competition. Quality and productivity are, therefore, exceptionally important. In Europe, the yearly growth rate for the food industry, which is the largest industry in the European Union, is 5 percent. The industry comprises more than 286,000 companies and employs 4.2 million people.

Annual lubricant demand of food manufacturers in the European Union (EU-25) is approximately 60,000 metric tons (130 million pounds). Globally the proportion of dedicated food grade lubricants used in these factories varies between 0 and 30 percent from one country to another, Stempfel said.

This results in an estimated potential of about 15,000 metric tons (33 million pounds) of dedicated food grade lubricants in EU-25 only. The most important markets in Europe are Germany, Italy, Great Britain, France, Spain and the Netherlands.

Cost of Contamination

Almost every day, we are faced with crisis situations relating to foodstuffs, Stempfel said, where manufacturers need to recall products contaminated by a variety of substances harmful to humans. This, in turn, damages the manufacturers image and brand name. A number of such crises in the food industry can be found on websites like: www.recalls.gov.au and www.ukrecallnotice.co.uk.

As an example, he cited a 2008 instance where the European Commission blocked imports of Ukrainian sunflower oil until the country put a strict system of checks in place, after tainted product was discovered in 24 countries. Total sunflower-seed oil exports from Ukraine to the EU are worth U.S. $1 billion a year; so the consequences of the ban were significant.

In other cases, food manufacturers in the United States recalled 40,000 kilograms of sliced turkey, various kinds of smoked ham and baby food that may have been contaminated with non-food grade lubricants. Stempfel pointed out, In these cases, only 0.5 percent of the meat recalled was actually contaminated, but 250,000 kg were recalled, at considerable cost to the suppliers.

In addition to increased statutory requirements, such incidents have provided the major impetus to food manufacturers to invest a great deal of money and energy in developing safer procedures, he added. This is not surprising when one considers what can happen when a well-known company suddenly finds itself getting negative headlines in the media.

Stempfel cited two other examples of the high cost of produce contamination, both in direct monetary costs and loss of business. In one case, the recall of contaminated milk in Japan in 2000 and 2001 resulted in direct losses of 53 billion and 72 billion, a workforce reduction from 5,500 to 4,000 (27 percent) in the first year and a further workforce reduction of 1,500 in 2003.

Finally, a Belgian soft drink manufacturer had to recall contaminated products that resulted in recall costs of U.S. $103 million, 5 percent drop in sales and 20 percent drop in share value. In this case, it is interesting to note that the sales and share value of the companys main competitor also were harmed by this incident, Stempfel said.

A glance at the market value of a global brand is sufficient to understand why manufacturers are so vigilant in protecting their reputations. (See table on page 26.) Stempfel explained that to help ensure food safety, lubricant manufacturers often offer so-called lubrication charts to their customers, sometimes in conjunction with a lubrication critical control point (CCP) survey. Often a flow chart showing critical areas of production is used as a starting point.

Customers fall into two categories: They use H1 lubricants only in CCPs, or they use H1 lubricants in the whole plant. By using H1 lubricants only in CCPs, a basic rule is that the critical lubrication points are located above or lateral to the food flow, Stempfel said. Lubrication points below the food flow can be lubricated with conventional lubricants as long as they are not pressurized. However, he warned, in choosing this approach, be aware that non-H1 lubricants can be transferred from nonsensitive to sensitive areas on shoes, and there is a danger of mixing H1 with non-H1 lubricants in the lubricant storage area.

Food Grade Lube Requirements

The requirements for food-grade lubricants are not governed exclusively by technical considerations such as speed, load and operating conditions. It must also be kept in mind that machinery and facilities are developed and built on the basis of hygiene considerations. And the lubricant should be regarded as an element in the design, said Stempfel. It is entirely possible that the requirements placed on it may deviate from normal industry standards.

Also, the formulator is severely restricted by the limited number of permitted additives and base oils available. As a consequence, it may not always be possible to achieve maximum operating performance, he added.

As a rule, food-grade lubricants do not differ fundamentally from standard mineral oil-based products. The same production facilities can usually be used; however, during the manufacture of food-grade lubricants, more stringent rules must be applied to provide the greatest possible purity and avoid cross-contamination.

According to the current standard, food grade lubricants must be produced only in those parts of a production facility (conduits, mixing vessels, bottling plant) that are certified according to ISO 9001/14001/21469. A number of lubricant manufacturers have even carried out a CCP analysis in their plants, and use food grade lubricants to lubricate their own equipment, Stempfel said. In addition, manufacturers increasingly apply so-called Good Manufacturing Practice in their certified facilities, which from our point of view is the most progressive way to produce food grade lubricants, he commented.

Stempfel said, In speaking with customers in the food industry, I often hear that H1 lubricants are generally worse than standard lubricants, lifetime and wear protection are problems and application is difficult and problematic. This may have been the case 20 years ago. Today, modern H1 lubricants are well designed and balanced high performance products.

He continued, Food grade lubricants are not exotic components. Their selection and application follow the same rules as for standard lubricants.

This point continues to be the subject of discussion, especially between users or original equipment manufacturers and lubricant suppliers. Depending on geographic location, the prevailing opinion is that lubricants for the food industry do not come up to the performance levels of standard lubricants, Stempfel said. Users contend that more problems of wear and tear occur and that oil lifetime is reduced.

Stempfel countered this view by saying, Synthetic [food grade] lubricants, in particular, now achieve performance profiles at least as high as those of conventional synthetic lubricants, if not higher. Synthetic lubricants usually provide cleaner and safer products, superior performance, extended life, a rationalized portfolio, the need for fewer lubricants, reduced downtime, minimal waste and disposal and extended machine life. All this will result in lower overall maintenance costs and improved food safety, he said.

Stempfel concluded by saying, Todays H1 lubricants are high-performance lubricants, based on selected technical, pharmaceutical, medicinal mineral white oils or synthetic base fluids. He admitted that food-grade lubricants can be more expensive because the manufacturer is allowed to use only designated USFDA chemicals, and the products should be manufactured in dedicated parts of the plant, resulting in higher R&D and manufacturing costs. However, he pointed out that the higher price is often compensated by longer lubricant life and lower maintenance costs, especially when using synthetic products.